[Leica] BLUR - My last words.

[grduprey at mchsi.com (grduprey at mchsi.com)]

As does our dog.  He jumps at loud noises from the tv, and barks at images 
of animals on it also.

Gene

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Barbour" <steve.barbour at gmail.com>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 9:00:54 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Re: [Leica] BLUR - My last words.


On Aug 14, 2013, at 5:43 AM, lrzeitlin at aol.com wrote:

> Forget about all that nonsense about flapping hummingbird's wings and 
> moving fan blades. You can't see speeding bullets either. If we were 
> trying to truly depict reality, any photo which shows a hummingbird's 
> wings clearly is false. George Lottermoser sums it up best by saying:
> "two dimensional visual art relies on convention, creativity and 
> technology."
> 
> 
> Any two dimensional photo is an artifact which requires considerable 
> learning to interpret. Most discussions of photographic "truth" tend to 
> obscure the fact that ALL photographs are abstract representations of an 
> external world. When Margaret Mead showed Tahitian natives black and white 
> photographs of themselves and their village, they rotated the photos this 
> way and that, shook their heads, and handed them back. "Nice designs", 
> they said, "but what are they?" Mead then realized that photographs were 
> such abstractions that only long experience enables their interpretation.
> 
> 
> Closer to home, your dog does not jump into the TV screen to frolic in the 
> fields shown in the dog food commercials. Neither does it growl or flee 
> from the TV intruders in your household. The image on TV is not the real 
> world to the animal but a flickering pattern on an illuminated tube. We 
> see the image as a depiction of reality because our intelligence and 
> experience enables us infer the scene from its abstract representation. 
> The animal does not.




***my puppy does....






> 
> 
> The article that George cites is the best short piece I have seen on the 
> depiction of motion in art. Read it.
> http://www.sophia.org/tutorials/elements-of-art-movement-and-time
> 
> 
> My comments are based on the feeling that most LUGGERS are so immersed in 
> two dimensional image making that they assume the learned conventions of 
> photography represent the world as seen by the human eye. I am 
> nearsighted. When I remove my glasses EVERYTHING is blurred. When I wake 
> up in the morning am I to assume that the world is in violent motion which 
> stops the moment I put on my glasses?
> 
> 
> I am not a zealot on the topic. If you look at my own submissions to the 
> Motion contest, you will see that I use both techniques, blur and content, 
> to imply motion. Horses for courses I say.
> 
> 
> &lt;http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Larry+Z/Dive_001.jpg.html&gt;
> &lt;http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Larry+Z/Basketball.jpg.html&gt;
> 
> 
> Larry Z
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information